Skip to main content

Full text of "USPTO Patents Application 09585980"

See other formats


//f^^^P^^J^ Unihed States Bvtent and TVeAPEMARK Office 



UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMEBCE 
Uaited States Putexit und Tradumtirk OCGct; 
AUtli-«»d: COMMISSIONER OF PATENTS AND TRADEMARKS 
Washinpton, D.C. 2UiJai 



1 APPLICATION NO. 


FILING DATE 


FIRST NAMED INVENTOR 


ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. 


CONFIRMATION NO. 


09/585,980 




06/02/2000 


Lizhi Wang 


80398.P322 


5683 


7590 


04/28/2003 









Dennis A Nichoils 
Blakely Sokoloff Taylor & Zafinan LLP 
12400 Wilshire Boulevard 7th Floor 
Los Angeles, CA 90025 



HESSELTINE, RYAN J 



ART UNIT 



PAPER NUMBER 



2623 

DATE MAILED: 04/28/2003 



Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding. 



PTO-90C (Rev. 07-01) 



Office Action Summary 



Application No. 

09/585,980 



Examiner 

Ryan J Hesseltine 



Appllcant(s) 

WANG. LIZHI 



Art Unit 

2623 



The MAILING DATE of this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address - 
Period for Reply 

A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTH(S) FROM 
THE MAILING DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION. 

- Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1 .1 36(a). In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed 
after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication. 

- If the period for reply specified above is less than thirty (30) days, a reply within the statutory minimum of thirty (30) days will be considered timely. 

- If NO period for reply Is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication. 

- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 1 33). 

- Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, even if timely filed, may reduce any 
earned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b). 

Status 

1 )□ Responsive to communication(s) filed on . 



2a)n This action is FINAL. 2b)^ This action is non-final. 

3) n Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is 

closed in accordance with the practice under Ex parte Quayle, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213. 
Disposition of Clainfis 

4) 13 Claim(s) 1-23 is/are pending in the application. 

4a) Of the above claim(s) is/are withdrawn from consideration. 

5) n Claim(s) is/are allowed. 

6) IE1 Claim(s) 1-23 is/are rejected. 
?)□ Claim(s) is/are objected to. 

8) n Claim(s) are subject to restriction and/or election requirement. 

Application Papers 

9) 0 The specification is objected to by the Examiner. 

10) KI The drawing(s) filed on 02 June 2000 is/are: a)n accepted or b)IEI objected to by the Examiner. 

Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1 .85(a). 

11) 0 The proposed drawing correction filed on is: a)n approved b)n disapproved by the Examiner. 

If approved, corrected drawings are required in reply to this Office action. 

12) D The oath or declaration is objected to by the Examiner, 
Priority under 35 U.S.C. §§119 and 120 

1 3) 0 Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 1 1 9(a)-(d) or (f). 

a)nAII b)n Some*c)n None of: 

1 .□ Certified copies of the priority documents have been received. 

2. n Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No. . 

3. n Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage 

application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)). 
* See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received. 

14) 0 Acknowledgment is made of a claim for domestic priority under 35 U.S.C. § 1 19(e) (to a provisional application). 

a) □ The translation of the foreign language provisional application has been received. 

15) 0 Acknowledgment is made of a claim for domestic priority under 35 U.S.C. §§ 120 and/or 121 . 
Attachment(s) 

1 ) ^ Notice of References Cited (PTO-892) 4) □ Interview Summary (PTO-41 3) Paper No(s). . 

2) D Notice of Draflsperson's Patent Drawing Review (PTO-948) 5) □ Notice of Infomnal Patent Application (PTO-1 52) 

3) S Infomnation Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO-1 449) Paper No{s) 2 . 6) □ Other: 



U.S. Patent and Trademark Office 
PTO-326 (Rev. 04-01) 



Office Action Sunrimary 



Part of Paper No, 3 



Application/Control Number: 09/585,980 
Art Unit: 2623 



Page 2 



DETAILED ACTION 
Drawings 

1 . This application lacks formal drawings. The informal drawings filed in this application 
are acceptable for examination purposes. When the application is allowed, applicant will be 
required to submit new formal drawings. 

2. Color photographs and color drawings are acceptable only for examination purposes 
unless a petition filed under 37 CFR 1. 84(a)(2) is granted permitting their use as acceptable 
drawings. In the event that applicant wishes to use the drawings currently on file as acceptable 
drawings, a petition must be filed for acceptance of the color photographs or color drawings as 
acceptable drawings. Any such petition must be accompanied by the appropriate fee set forth in 
37 CFR 1.17(h), three sets of color drawings or color photographs, as appropriate, and an 
amendment to the first paragraph of the brief description of the drawings section of the 

specification which states: 

The patent or application file contains at least one drawing executed in color. Copies of this patent or patent 
application publication with color drawing(s) will be provided by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office upon 
request and payment of the necessary fee. 

Color photographs will be accepted if the conditions for accepting color drawings have 
been satisfied. 

Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 

3. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all 

obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: 

(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in 
section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are 
such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person 
having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the 
manner in which the invention was made. 



Application/Control Number: 09/585,980 Page 3 

Art Unit: 2623 

4. Claims 1, 4, 5, 8, 12, 15, 16,19, and 23 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being 
unpatentable over Kinjo (USPN 5,629,752) in view of Wang et al. (USPN 5,802,361), hereafter 
Wang, both cited on applicant's IDS. 

5. Regarding claims 1 and 23, Kinjo discloses a method of determining at least one 
candidate patch for human faces in a color graphic image (column 19, line 18-25), comprising: 
determining a first area wherein a color gradient (changing differential values) has a low value 
(exclude the regions in which differential values change regularly; column 18, line 65 to column 
19, line 17); and determining a second area wherein an intensity value (density contrast) has a 
high value (exclude regions whose density contrast is less than or equal to a predetermined 
value; column 18, line 48-64). Kinjo discloses that these steps are performed one after another 
(see figure 3b, steps 152-162), but does not explicitly disclose that a logical AND is performed 
on the first and second areas to create a third area or selecting portions of the third area with 
suitable hue saturation. 

6. Wang discloses a method and system for searching graphic images and videos wherein 
images are analyzed to extract various statistical abstractions to be related to semantically 
meaningftil abstractions that a user may use to describe the image (column 8, line 20-28). Wang 
goes on to disclose that the user may search for motion, color, or a texture as well as a specific 
object such as a human face (column 12, line 36-38) and that the user may search for multiple 
attributes by performing a logical AND (conjunction) on a first area containing a specific 
attribute (such as low color gradient) and a second area containing another attribute (such as high 
intensity) to create a third area including both desired attributes (column 17, line 9-24). Wang 
also discloses selecting portions of said third area with suitable hue saturation (column 11, line 



Application/Control Number: 09/585,980 Page 4 

Art Unit: 2623 

32-46) to form said at least one candidate patch (column 17, line 38-42). It would have been 
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to perform a logical 
AND on a first area and a second area to create a third area and select portions of the third area 
v^th suitable hue saturation as taught by Wang in order to designate areas of an image by 
searching for a combination of specific attributes, such as with smooth color gradient and high 
intensity values as well as designating a specific color range (column 5, line 1 1-20). 

7. Regarding claim 12, Kinjo discloses a system configured to determine at least one 
location of a human face in a color graphic image (column 19, line 18-25), comprising: a color 
gradient map configured to indicate true where a color gradient (changing differential values) has 
a low value (exclude the regions in which differential values change regularly; column 18, line 
65 to column 19, line 17); an intensity map configured to indicate true where an intensity value 
(density contrast) has a high value (exclude regions whose density contrast is less than or equal 
to a predetermined value; column 18, line 48-64). Wang discloses (see above discussion of 
claim 1 and 23) a combined map (conjunction) configured to indicate true where said color 
gradient map is true and said intensity map is true (column 17, line 9-24); and at least one 
candidate patch selected from said combined map (column 17, line 38-42), wherein said 
candidate patches each have suitable hue saturation (column 11, line 32-46). 

8. Regarding claims 4 and 15, Kinjo discloses that said determining said second area 
(density) uses a second threshold value comparison (column 17, line 33-42). 

9. Regarding claims 5 and 16, Kinjo does not explicitly disclose that said second threshold 
is determined by normalization, but does disclose that the average density of the image is 
calculated and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the 



Application/Control Number: 09/585,980 Page 5 

Art Unit: 2623 

invention was made to use the average density as the predetermined threshold for binarization 
(column 17, line 4-9). 

10. Regarding claims 8 and 19, Kinjo discloses fitting an ellipse (elliptical region) to one of 
said at least one candidate patch (column 21, line 21-28). 

11. Claims 2, 3, 13, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over 
Kinjo in view of Wang as applied to claims 1 and 12 above, and further in view of Eleftheriadis 
et al. (USPN 5,852,669), hereafter Eleftheriadis, cited on applicant's IDS. 

12. Regarding claim 2 and 13, neither Kinjo nor Wang disclose that the first area pertaining 
to a low color gradient is determined using a threshold. Eleftheriadis discloses an automatic face 
and facial feature location detection system wherein a gradient magnitude image is obtained by 
generating the magnitude of the gradient at each pixel and binarizing the edges using a threshold 
circuit (column 6, line 24-39). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at 
the time the invention was made to determine an area having a low color gradient using a 
threshold as taught by Eleftheriadis in order to provide a fixed, possibly adjustable, distinction 
between areas having high and low color gradients. 

13. Regarding claims 3 and 14, Eleftheriadis does not explicitly disclose that the threshold 
value is determined by normalization, but normalization is a common method of determining a 
threshold for any operation and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at 
the time the invention was made to determine the threshold by normalization. 

14. Claims 6, 7, 9-11, 17, 18, and 20-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being 
unpatentable over Kinjo in view of Wang as applied to claims 1, 8, 12, and 19 above, and fiirther 
in view of Lobo et al. (USPN 5,781,650), hereafter Lobo, cited on applicant's IDS. 



Application/Control Number: 09/585,980 Page 6 

Art Unit: 2623 

15. Regarding claims 6 and 17, neither Kinjo nor Wang disclose that said third area is eroded 
or that said combined map includes an eroded boundary. Lobo discloses a system for automatic 
feature detection and age classification of human faces in digital images including a face 
template that is used for oval-fitting by the use of a potential image of an edge where a 
morphological operator first broadens the image's similar intensity regions, then narrows 
(erodes) the similar intensity regions in a copy of the image, and finally the narrowed image is 
subtracted from the broadened image (column 4, line 44-57). It would have been obvious to one 
of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to erode similar intensity regions as 
taught by Lobo in order to remove stray pixels and to isolate edges for detection. 

16. Regarding claims 7 and 1 8, Lobo discloses that said eroding (narrowing) is 
morphological (column 4, line 49-63). 

17. Regarding claims 9 and 20, neither Kinjo nor Wang explicitly disclose determining if 
said ellipse is a bad fit to said at least one candidate patch or that said ellipse includes a degree of 
fit measure. Lobo discloses an oval fitting operation including iteratively updating the oval 
center position and the oval axes half-lengths until the total energy stabilizes around a minimum 
value and a final fit has been reached (column 5, line 39-48). It would have been obvious to one 
of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to determine the degree of fit of an 
ellipse about a candidate patch as taught by Lobo in order to ensure that the ellipse/oval is 
properly positioned and scaled to include the optimum amount of information for personnel 
identification or the like. 



Application/Control Number: 09/585,980 Page 7 

Art Unit: 2623 

18. Regarding claims 10 and 21, Lobo discloses further processing said at least one candidate 
patch when said ellipse is a bad fit (iteratively update until total energy stabilizes; column 5, line 
39-48). 

19. Regarding claims 1 1 and 22, Kinjo discloses determining if said one of said at least one 
candidate patch is too smooth (column 18, line 54-63). 

Conclusion 

20. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's 
disclosure. USPN 5,450,504 to Calia discloses a method for finding a most likely matching of a 
target facial image in a database of facial images including a threshold determination of gradient 
areas. USPN 5,787,186 to Schroeder discloses a biometric security process for authenticating 
identity and credit cards, visas, passports and facial recognition including a Sobel fiher or 
gradient to determine the contour edges of a face. USPN 5,828,769 to Burns discloses a method 
and apparatus for recognition of objects via position and orientation consensus of local image 
encoding including normalizing with respect to changes in contrast using gradients. USPN 
6,188,777 to Darrell et al. discloses a method and apparatus for personnel detection and tracking 
including thresholding a gradient response. 

Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the 
examiner should be directed to Ryan J Hesseltine whose telephone number is 703-306-4069. 
The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday, 8 AM - 4:30 PM. 

If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's 
supervisor, Amelia Au can be reached on 703-308-6604. The fax phone numbers for the 



Application/Control Number: 09/585,980 



Pages 



Art Unit: 2623 

organization where this application or proceeding is assigned are 703-872-93 14 for regular 
communications and 703-872-9314 for After Final communications. 

Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding 
should be directed to the receptionist whose telephone number is 703-306-0377. 



rjh 

April 18, 2003 




SUPERVISORY PATENT EXAMINER 
TECHNOLOGY CENTER 2600